CIND.L vs. QQQM
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM).
CIND.L and QQQM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CIND.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 TR USD. It was launched on Jan 26, 2010. QQQM is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index. It was launched on Oct 13, 2020. Both CIND.L and QQQM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CIND.L or QQQM.
Key characteristics
| CIND.L | QQQM | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 18.14% | 25.91% |
| 1Y Return | 30.15% | 37.02% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 8.45% | 9.99% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.61 | 2.12 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.69 | 2.80 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.48 | 1.38 |
| Calmar Ratio | 5.11 | 2.70 |
| Martin Ratio | 14.14 | 9.88 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.98% | 3.71% |
| Daily Std Dev | 10.83% | 17.28% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.68% | -35.05% |
| Current Drawdown | -0.52% | -0.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIND.L and QQQM is 0.37, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 18.14% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 25.91% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIND.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Dividends
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison
CIND.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIND.L iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 0.64% | 0.65% | 0.83% | 0.40% | 0.16% |
Drawdowns
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, roughly equal to the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and QQQM. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CIND.L vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) is 4.26%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 5.13%. This indicates that CIND.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.